linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 02/26] hugetlb: sort hstates in hugetlb_init

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Yry+uxxA2/wsK8G9@monkey>
Date:   Wed, 29 Jun 2022 14:06:03 -0700
From:   Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>
To:     Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>
Cc:     James Houghton <jthoughton@...gle.com>,
        Peter Xu <peterx@...hat.com>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Axel Rasmussen <axelrasmussen@...gle.com>,
        Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>,
        Jue Wang <juew@...gle.com>,
        Manish Mishra <manish.mishra@...anix.com>,
        "Dr . David Alan Gilbert" <dgilbert@...hat.com>,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 02/26] hugetlb: sort hstates in hugetlb_init_hstates

On 06/29/22 14:39, Muchun Song wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 08:40:27AM -0700, James Houghton wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 11:42 AM Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 06/24/22 17:36, James Houghton wrote:
> > > > When using HugeTLB high-granularity mapping, we need to go through the
> > > > supported hugepage sizes in decreasing order so that we pick the largest
> > > > size that works. Consider the case where we're faulting in a 1G hugepage
> > > > for the first time: we want hugetlb_fault/hugetlb_no_page to map it with
> > > > a PUD. By going through the sizes in decreasing order, we will find that
> > > > PUD_SIZE works before finding out that PMD_SIZE or PAGE_SIZE work too.
> > > >
> > >
> > > This may/will cause problems for gigantic hugetlb pages allocated at boot
> > > time.  See alloc_bootmem_huge_page() where a pointer to the associated hstate
> > > is encoded within the allocated hugetlb page.  These pages are added to
> > > hugetlb pools by the routine gather_bootmem_prealloc() which uses the saved
> > > hstate to add prep the gigantic page and add to the correct pool.  Currently,
> > > gather_bootmem_prealloc is called after hugetlb_init_hstates.  So, changing
> > > hstate order will cause errors.
> > >
> > > I do not see any reason why we could not call gather_bootmem_prealloc before
> > > hugetlb_init_hstates to avoid this issue.
> > 
> > Thanks for catching this, Mike. Your suggestion certainly seems to
> > work, but it also seems kind of error prone. I'll have to look at the
> > code more closely, but maybe it would be better if I just maintained a
> > separate `struct hstate *sorted_hstate_ptrs[]`, where the original
> 
> I don't think this is a good idea.  If you really rely on the order of
> the initialization in this patch.  The easier solution is changing
> huge_bootmem_page->hstate to huge_bootmem_page->hugepagesz. Then we
> can use size_to_hstate(huge_bootmem_page->hugepagesz) in
> gather_bootmem_prealloc().
> 

That is a much better solution.  Thanks Muchun!

-- 
Mike Kravetz